Do Metaphysical Beliefs Manipulate Moral Competency? A Study in the Context of Cultural Diversities, Involving Global Population

International Journal of Scientific Research in Knowledge, 2(7), pp. 328-339, 2014

Available online at http://www.ijsrpub.com/ijsrk

ISSN: 2322-4541; ©2014 IJSRPUB

http://dx.doi.org/10.12983/ijsrk-2014-p0328-0339

328

Full Length Research Paper

Do Metaphysical Beliefs Manipulate Moral Competency? A Study in the Context of

Cultural Diversities, Involving Global Population

Bipin P. Varghese1*, S. John Michael Raj

2

1Doctoral Research Scholar, R&D Centre/Dept. of Psychology, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, India

2Dean [CDC] & Professor, Dept. of Psychology, Bharathiar University Coimbatore, India

*Corresponding Author: [email protected]

Received 17 May 2014; Accepted 22 June 2014

Abstract. Morality is the faculty of the human mind that enables an individual to act according to what is „right‟ or stand for

„truth‟ and exhibit moral behaviour. Moral competency is the measure of the consistency of moral behaviour and is influenced

by various psycho-social, geo-political, biological and environmental factors. Metaphysical beliefs and religio-spiritual

affiliation are some known psycho-social factors that play a major role in shaping the morality in course of moral development

and socialization of an individual. The present study attempts to explore the influence of basic metaphysical beliefs like faith in

God, Afterlife, and belief in the influence of present life on afterlife; on moral competency. The present study conducted on

N=415 samples from across the world and diverse cultures reveals that metaphysical beliefs influence moral competency to a

significant extent.

Keywords: Metaphysical Beliefs, Moral Competency, Morality, God, Afterlife, Moral Behaviour

1. INTRODUCTION

Morality is the key faculty of the human mind that

enable an individual to act according to what is „right‟

and stand for „truth‟, irrespective of the consequences.

The will to stand according to one‟s own convictions

is a major determinant of morality and driving force of

moral behaviour. Morality is shaped by an array of

factors and various psycho-social, geo-political,

biological and environmental factors are studied to

have specific influence on moral development of an

individual. It is understood that the specific

metaphysical beliefs, cultural values and religio-

spiritual institutional affiliation have significant

influence on morality- although there are opposing

world views rejecting this notion. Most of the

metaphysical questions revolve around the concept of

„God‟ and there are differences between the religions

and worldviews in the understanding of the concept of

God. Most monotheistic religions endorse the

theological concept of God as an entity that is

omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent and as the

creator and sustainer of the universe. Some

monotheistic religions also consider God as formless.

On the other hand majority of the polytheistic

religions endorse an anthropomorphic concept of God,

i.e. God as an entity behaving like humans; possessing

desires, emotions, beliefs etc. Keeping the differences

between the religions and worldviews apart, the

concept of „God‟ generally refers to the Supreme

Being who is the creator and sustainer of the universe,

life and everything existing; who is omniscient,

omnipotent and omnipresent. (Rossano, 2006; Gray

and Wegner, 2007; Demoulin et al., 2008). This study

focuses on exploring the influence of various

metaphysical beliefs on moral competency.

2. LITERATURE

2.1. Operational Meaning of the Variables

2.1.1. Metaphysical Beliefs

Metaphysics derived from the Greek

words μετά (metá, "beyond", "upon" or "after")

and υυσικά (physiká, "physics") deals with the

fundamental quest of the human mind concerning the

understanding of „being‟, „existence‟ and „beyond‟.

Metaphysics is the science of the „immaterial‟ or what

is beyond physical reality, and deals mostly with the

intangibles. Most of the metaphysical concepts are

abstract in nature and the metaphysical beliefs that an

individual holds has significant influence on their

morality and moral orientation. The religious

Varghese and Raj

Do Metaphysical Beliefs Manipulate Moral Competency? A Study in the Context of Cultural Diversities, Involving

Global Population

329

worldviews hitherto existing are fundamentally the

human attempt to understand the „metaphysical‟ and

to interpret it in human language. All religions and

spiritualistic traditions across the world are centred on

the metaphysical notions of God, soul, eternity,

afterlife etc. and the basic differences between the

various worldviews are their basic explanations of the

fundamental questions relating to the metaphysical

notions. All religious traditions sets apart it own

ethical code of conduct which play a significant role

in the socialization and moral conditioning of the

individuals (Varghese and Raj, 2014). Majority of the

world religions have a distinct position on the basic

questions regarding the existence or non existence of

God or a Higher Being and Afterlife. Multifarious

concepts exist in the worldviews pertaining to

Afterlife such as eternity of the soul, reincarnation or

rebirth, renewed life in heaven, life in a paradise or

new earth etc. The present study attempts to explore

the influence of the elementary metaphysical beliefs

such as „Faith in God‟, Belief in Afterlife, and the

belief in the influence of present life on afterlife on

Moral Competency.

2.1.2. Moral Competency

Competency refers to the „capability‟, „capacity‟,

„efficiency‟, „proficiency‟, „skill‟ etc. with which an

action is performed. Though the term competency is

identified with different meanings, it is generally

interpreted as a specialized system of abilities,

proficiencies, or skills that are necessary to reach a

specific task or goal (Weinert, 2001). Morality is the

faculty of the human mind that enables an individual

to act according to what is „right‟ or stand for „truth‟

and exhibit moral behaviour. In line with the

synonyms enumerated for competency, „Moral

Competency‟ is the competence with which a moral

action is performed and is the active application of

moral intelligence. Moral competency is an outgrowth

of „living in alignment‟ with the basic moral

principles, values and beliefs (Lennick and Kiel,

2005). In other words moral competency is the

consistency of the moral behaviour of an individual.

In line with the studies of Lennick and Kiel (2005),

moral competency measured in this study is the sum

total of the scores in the 10 subscales as below,

referred to as moral traits in this study.

(a) Integrity: Acting consistently with principles,

values and beliefs; (b) Honesty: Telling the truth; (c)

Courage: Standing up for what is Right; (d) Loyalty:

Keeping promises; (e) Responsibility: Taking

responsibility for personal choices; (f) Humility:

Admitting mistakes and failures; (g) Justice:

Embracing responsibility for serving others;

(h) Compassion: Actively caring about others;

(i) Detachment: Ability to let go of one‟s own

mistakes; (j) Forgiveness: Ability to let go of others‟

mistakes

2.2. Effect of Metaphysical Beliefs on Moral

Competency

Moral competency, as understood is the

consistency with which an individual exhibits moral

behaviour. Moral competency is influenced by a

number of psycho-social, geo-political, biological and

environmental factors at various capacities. Religion

and faith in God plays a significant role in promoting

moral behaviour in the society. Unjust acts against the

known scriptural codes provoke strong negative

emotions in a religious believer Mikula et al. (1998),

which may induce moral evaluation (Greene and

Haidt, 2002) of the actions of the self and actions that

induce feelings of disgust that are judged to be

immoral even when people cannot offer a logical

explanation for their judgment (Haidt et al., 1993).

Religious believers perceive violations of their

religious code to be offensive to God, and actions that

cause offense to other people to be severe moral

violations than identical actions that do not (Mikula et

al., 1998; Knobe, 2003). Previous studies in the area

of moral psychology have found that faith in God and

religious concepts elicit norms of fairness in social

interactions. According to a study conducted by

Shariff and Norenzayan (2007), religious orientation

increase generosity among dictator game participants

and decrease tendencies of cheating (Mazar et al.,

2007).

Many true believers in God consider their

relationships to be subject to the same norms of

reciprocal altruism as their social relationships with

other human beings (Johnson and Krüger, 2004;

Bering, 2006) and the nature of relationships people

have with God often reflects in the nature of

relationships they have with others (Kirkpatrick and

Shaver, 1992). On the other hand the fear of

omniscient and omnipotent supernatural God deters

group defectors, particularly in large groups where the

rule and law is difficult to enforce (Raven, 1999;

Atran and Norenzayan, 2004; Johnson and Krüger,

2004; Bering, 2006). The understanding that, actions

that cause harm to others are more blameworthy than

identical actions that cause no harm enable an

individual to be considerate towards others (Knobe,

2003; Cushman et al., 2006) and the fear of a Supreme

Being and Judgement of actions, may promote moral

behaviour. In light of the earlier studies in the domain

of moral psychology it is understood that

metaphysical beliefs including the religio-spiritual

institutional affiliation has significant influence on

moral competency (Varghese and Raj, 2014; Greene


330

and Haidt, 2002; Mikula et al., 1998). In light of the

existing knowledge connecting metaphysical beliefs

and moral competency, this study attempts to explore

in detail the influence of metaphysical beliefs such as

„Faith in God‟, „Belief in Afterlife‟ and the „Belief in

the Influence of the Present Life on After life‟ on

moral competency and specific moral traits.

3. RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

The present study hypothesised that there will be

difference in the levels of moral competency in the

individuals with reference to the various metaphysical

beliefs they hold and in order to experimentally verify

the same, the following hypotheses were derived:

Hypothesis 1: Moral competency differs

significantly between individuals who „believe‟ and

„do not believe‟ in a personal God or a Higher Being

beyond Self.

Hypothesis 2: Moral Competency differs


„do not believe‟ in a life after death.

Hypothesis 3: Moral Competency differs


„do not believe‟ in the notion that there will be an

Afterlife/Judgement after death and the present life

will influence that.

4. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY AND ITS

IMPLICATION TO THE SOCIETY

Any research pertaining to Morality and Moral

competency bears high significance in the

contemporary society. The moral orientation of the

world societies are changing at a faster pace and the

moral values that the world societies upheld are

diminishing and gradually losing its meaning

(Varghese and Raj, 2014). Influence of belief system

on morality is comparatively unexplored in the

scientific studies and detailed researches in this area

would be beneficial in identifying the key psycho-

social indicators of morality and moral competency.

Knowledge of the same would also aid in developing

modules to impart focussed moral competency

enhancement in targeted population.

5. CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF THE RESEARCH

Fig. 1: Conceptual and Theoretical Model of the research

6. METHODOLOGY

6.1. Sample of the Study

Sample of the present study comprised of a

heterogeneous population including individuals from

different countries across the continents. A total of

415 individuals participated in the study and the

sample comprised of 140 males and 275 females with

a mean age of 34.2 Yrs. Data was collected via online

sampling through the various social networking

portals including Facebook, Linkedin, Researchgate,

Googleplus etc. between February and April, 2014.

Link to the online questionnaire was posted in the

mentioned networking portals and the targeted

communities within. Purpose of the study and specific

instructions pertaining to the questionnaires were

made known to the respondents via. a detailed written

introduction, on accepting the call to participate in the

research. Respondents were also made known through

the introduction page regarding the approximate time

required to finish the questionnaire. Data of only those

respondents who have completed the questionnaire is

Varghese and Raj


Global Population

331

recorded and hence the number of participants who

left the research in between is not known.

The participants included individuals from 38

countries across the continents from culturally diverse

populations with representation from Egypt (8),

Ghana (2), Liberia (1), Nigeria (3), South Africa (5),

India (148), Nepal (10), Iran (2), Israel (1), Myanmar

(1), Pakistan (2), Philippines (1), UAE (1), Indonesia

(1), Kuwait (1), Thailand (1), UK (34), Belgium (3),

France (1), Greece (1), Italy (2), Lativia (1), Poland

(1), Portugal (9), Sweden (1), Norway (1), Spain (20),

Switzerland (1), USA (121), Canada (9), Trinidad &

Tobago (2), Mexico (1), New Zealand (12), Australia

(11), Venezuela (1), Argentina (6), Brazil (9) and

Colombia (5). As the population of the study was

largely heterogeneous with reference to their country

of inhabitation the respondents in this study were

grouped according to the geographical continent to

which they belong. Concisely, population of this study

includes 21 samples from South America, 23 from

Oceania, 133 from North America, 50 from Europe,

169 from Asia and 19 from Africa. The respondents

included individuals from all major theistic and non

theistic communities and religions representation

includes Buddhists (14), Christians (141), Hindus

(94), Jain (1), Jews (8), Muslims (17), Sikh (3),

Spiritualists (22), Agnoists (32), Atheists (31) and non

religious theists (20).

Fig. 2: Distribution of Samples according to Geographic Location

Fig. 3: Distribution of Samples as per their Religio-Spiritual Orientation

6.2. Instruments

Data pertaining to the moral competency and

metaphysical beliefs were collected from the

population of the study using Moral Competency

Inventory (Lennick & Kiel, 2005) and Metaphysical

survey questionnaire made for the study to collect

responses pertaining to specific metaphysical beliefs

identified for measurement.

Moral Competency Inventory is a 40 item tool

which measures various aspects of moral competency;

including the proclivity to act consistently with

principles, values and beliefs (integrity); truthfulness

(honesty); ability to stand up for what is right

(courage); keeping promises (loyalty); taking

responsibility for personal choices (responsibility);

admitting mistakes and failures (humility); embracing

responsibility for serving others (justice); actively

caring about others (compassion); ability to let go of


332

one‟s own mistakes (detachment) and ability to let go

of others mistakes (forgiveness). MCI is responded on

a five point Likert scale with responses ranging from

„Never‟ to „In all situations‟ which remains constant

throughout the entire instrument. Summative scores of

the responses, refer to the level of moral competency

of the individual. Martin (2010) reported an

acceptable validity for MCI with a Cronbach alpha

varying from 0.65-0.84 for the 10 subscales.

Reliability and validity of the tool has been

convincingly established

and is been taken as a

reliable tool for measuring aspects of moral

competency.

Following the administration of the moral

competency inventory, respondents were asked to

answer the below three questions targeted to collect

responses pertaining to their metaphysical beliefs.

(a) “Do you believe in a Personal God or Higher

Being Beyond Self?”

(b) “Do you believe in any form of Life After

Death?”

(c) “Do you believe that, if there is an Afterlife, the

present life will have some influence on it?”

Moral competency Inventory was scored and

analysed separately for the samples who responded

„Yes‟ and „No‟ to each metaphysical question forming

an „Yes Group” and „No Group‟. The scores obtained

were subjected to appropriate statistical analysis.

In addition, participants of this research were also

asked to furnish their personal and demographic

details including Gender, Age, Country of

inhabitation, Religio-Spiritual affiliation with multiple

drop-down options including provision to add

additional notes and remarks. Respondents were also

requested to enter their feedback and comments

regarding their experience, participating in this study,

to which majority responded positively and also

acknowledged that they had good experience as many

of the questions in the MCI invoked introspection at a

personal level.

7. RESULTS

For the analysis of the data obtained from the study

the respondents were categorised based on their

fundamental metaphysical beliefs pertaining to the

existence of a God or Higher Being, Afterlife and

Belief in the influence of the present life on the

Afterlife. Out of the 415 respondents 77% believed in

a God or a Higher Being where as 23% did not believe

in the concept of God. 65% of the respondents

believed in some form of life after death while 35%

rejected such a notion. On the question of a judgement

after death or the influence of present life on Afterlife,

56% of the participants said that they believe in the

notion where as 44% rejected the concept. Responses

of the MCI were tabulated and analysed for each

group of respondents supporting or opposing each

basic metaphysical notion and each hypotheses

derived for the study were tested using „t‟ test.

Fig. 4: Summary of Response Pertaining to Belief in the Existence of God or a Higher Being

321

[77%]

94

[23%] 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Yes No

Varghese and Raj


Global Population

333

Fig. 5: Summary of Response Pertaining to the Belief in After Life

Fig. 6: Summary of Response pertaining to the Belief in the Influence of the Current Life on After Life

In order to test the hypothesis derived for the

study, the data was analysed using „t‟ test and in each

of the three cases, it was seen that the “Yes Group”

and the “No group” significantly differed on their

level of moral competency. Between the group that

believe and do not believe in the existence of God,

there was a mean difference of 2.539 with a

corresponding P Value of 0.0477 which is statistically

significant and hence the Hypothesis „1‟ that “Moral

competency differs significantly between individuals

who „believe‟ and „do not believe‟ in a personal God

of a higher being beyond self”, is confirmed and

accepted. On analysing with specific moral traits the

„Yes‟ group and „No‟ group were found to differ

significantly on their levels of „Responsibility‟,

“Humility‟ and „Detachment‟. Table 1 and Table 2

below shows the results of the „t‟ test.

To test hypothesis „2‟ that “Moral Competency

differs significantly between individuals who „believe‟

and „do not believe‟ in a life after death”, the data was

analysed using „t‟ test and the two groups showed a

mean difference of 1.85 with a corresponding P Value

of 0.477 which is statistically significant to approve

the hypothesis. On analysing with specific moral traits

the „Yes‟ group and „No‟ group were found to differ

significantly on their levels of „Integrity, „Honesty‟,

„Loyalty‟, „Responsibility‟, „Justice‟, „Compassion‟

and „Detachment‟. Details of the „t‟ test are furnished

in the Table 3 and Table 4 below.

268

[65%]

147

[35%]

Yes No

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

232

[56%]

183

[44%]

Yes No

0

50

100

150

200

250


334

Table 1: Result of the „t‟ test, SD, SEM and Mean Difference in Moral Competence of those who believe in God or a Higher

Being and Not

Mean SD SEM N Mean

Difference T df P Value Significance

[YES]

Believe in the Existence

of God or a Higher Being

78.88 7.89 0.44 320

1.851 1.9857 411 0.0477 *** [NO]

Do not Believe in the

Existence of God or a

Higher Being

77.03 7.99 0.83 93

Table 2: Result s of the „t‟ test, SD, SEM and Mean Difference in the various traits of Moral Competency of those who believe

in God or a Higher being and Not

Moral Trait Response Mean SD SEM N Mean

Difference t df

P

Value Sig

Integrity Yes Group 16.06 2.42 0.14 320

0.35 1.24 411 0.2146 NS No Group 15.71 2.16 0.22 93

Honesty Yes Group 16.75 2 0.11 320

0.32 1.39 411 0.1658 NS No Group 16.43 1.79 0.19 93

Courage Yes Group 14.13 2.77 0.15 320

-0.23 0.72 411 0.4707 NS No Group 14.37 2.72 0.28 93

Loyalty Yes Group 17.03 1.89 0.11 320

0.29 1.31 411 0.1907 NS No Group 16.74 1.89 0.2 93

Responsibility Yes Group 16.53 2.08 0.12 320

0.54 2.26 411 0.0244 ** No Group 15.99 1.89 0.2 93

Humility Yes Group 16.43 2.2 0.12 320

0.84 3.30 411 0.0011 *** No Group 15.58 2.08 0.22 93

Justice Yes Group 14.98 2.33 0.13 320

0.51 1.81 411 0.0707 NS No Group 14.47 2.54 0.26 93

Compassion Yes Group 15.98 2.2 0.12 320

0.13 0.50 411 0.6169 NS No Group 15.85 2.35 0.24 93

Detachment Yes Group 15.1 2.48 0.14 320

0.86 2.97 411 0.0031 *** No Group 14.24 2.42 0.25 93

Forgiveness Yes Group 14.77 2.65 0.15 320

0.09 0.29 411 0.7711 NS No Group 14.68 2.27 0.23 93

Table 3: Result of the „t‟ test, SD, SEM and Mean Difference in Moral Competence of those who believe in a Life After Death

and Not

Mean SD SEM N

Mean

Difference T df

P

Value Significance

[YES]

Believe in Afterlife 79.496 7.722 0.473 267

2.928 3.63 411 0.0003 ***

[NO] Do not Believe in

Afterlife

76.568 8.015 0.663 146

Varghese and Raj


Global Population

335

Table 4: Results of the „t‟ test, SD, SEM and Mean Difference in the various traits of Moral Competency of those who believe

in a Life After Death and Not

Moral Trait Response Mean SD SEM N Mean

Difference t df

P

Value Sig

Integrity Yes Group 16.31 2.11 0.13 267

0.93 3.88 411 0.0001 **** No Group 15.38 2.69 0.22 146

Honesty Yes Group 16.91 1.87 0.11 267

0.67 3.35 411 0.0009 **** No Group 16.25 2.04 0.17 146

Courage Yes Group 14.25 2.84 0.17 267

0.2 0.70 411 0.4813 NS No Group 14.05 2.59 0.21 146

Loyalty Yes Group 17.18 1.78 0.11 267

0.59 3.03 411 0.0025 *** No Group 16.59 2.04 0.17 146

Responsibility Yes Group 16.61 2.03 0.12 267

0.57 2.72 411 0.0067 *** No Group 16.04 2.04 0.17 146

Humility Yes Group 16.39 2.19 0.13 267

0.43 1.89 411 0.0592 NS No Group 15.96 2.19 0.18 146

Justice Yes Group 15.17 2.27 0.14 267

0.85 3.52 411 0.0005 **** No Group 14.32 2.5 0.21 146

Compassion Yes Group 16.21 2.18 0.13 267

0.72 3.17 411 0.0017 **** No Group 15.49 2.27 0.19 146

Detachment Yes Group 15.09 2.58 0.16 267

0.52 2.04 411 0.0418 ** No Group 14.57 2.28 0.19 146

Forgiveness Yes Group 14.88 2.58 0.16 267

0.38 1.43 411 0.1509 NS No Group 14.5 2.54 0.21 146

Similarly hypothesis „3‟ was also tested using „t‟

test and the two groups showed a mean difference of

2.539 with a corresponding P Value of 0.0012 which

is statistically significant to accept the hypothesis.

Hence hypothesis „3‟ that “Moral Competency differs


„do not believe‟ in the notion that there will be a

judgement after death and the present life will

influence that” is accepted. On analysing with specific

moral traits the „Yes‟ group and „No‟ group were

found to differ significantly on their levels of

„Integrity‟, „Honesty‟, „Humility‟, „Justice‟,

„Compassion‟, „Detachment‟ and „Forgiveness‟. Table

5 and Table 6 shows the details of the „t‟ test.

Table 5: Result of the „t‟ test, SD, SEM and Mean Difference in Moral Competence of those who believe in the notion that the

present life influences after life and Not

Mean SD SEM N

Mean

Difference t df

P

Value Significance

[YES] Believe that, if there is an afterlife,

the present life have some influence

on after life

79.58 7.322 0.482 231

2.539 3.26 411 0.0012 ****

[NO] Do not Believe that, if there is an

afterlife, the present life have some

influence on after life

77.041 8.475 0.628 182


336

Table 6: Results of the „t‟ test, SD, SEM and Mean Difference in the various traits of Moral Competency of those who believe

in the notion that the present life influences after life and Not

[NS-Not Significant, **- Significant, ***- Very Significant, ****- Extremely Significant]

8. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

For appropriate statistical analysis to be administered,

the samples were grouped according to their „Yes‟ or

„No‟ response to the specific metaphysical questions

(referred to as „Yes‟ group and „No‟ group

accordingly) and the scores of the groups in the Moral

Competency Inventory were separately tabulated and

compared. On analysing the results obtained from the

study, it is seen that moral competency significantly

differ between groups with reference to their

metaphysical beliefs. On comparing the moral

competency of the groups with reference to their

response to the specific metaphysical question, “Do

you believe in a Personal God or a Higher Being

beyond self?”, the „Yes‟ group and the „No‟ group

showed a mean difference of 1.851 with a

corresponding p value of 0.0477 which is statically

significant to conclude that moral competency differs

between individuals who believe in a God and not.

Similarly the moral competency of the „Yes‟ group

and the „No‟ group to the question, “Do you believe in

any form of Life after Death?” showed a mean

difference of 2.928 with a corresponding p value of

0.0003 attaining a statistical significance to infer that

the moral competency differs between individuals

who believes in an afterlife and not. The „Yes‟ group

and „No‟ group to the question “Do you believe that,

if there is an afterlife, the present life will have some

influence on it?”, also showed a statically significant

mean difference of 2.539 with corresponding p value

of 0.0012 to deduce that individuals who believe in

the impact of present life on after life and not, differs

in their levels of moral competency.

On further detailed analysis of the statistical data

of the present study, it is also understood that the

metaphysical beliefs have significant influence on

specific moral traits. In this study it was seen that

„Faith in a Higher Being‟ significantly influences

some of the moral traits and the The „Yes‟ group and

„No‟ group were found to differ significantly in

Responsibility (MD-0.54; p-0.0244), Humility (MD-

0.84; p-0.0011) and Detachment (MD-0.86; p-

0.0031). The „Yes‟ group and „No‟ group in „Belief in

Afterlife‟ significantly differed in the moral traits;

Integrity (MD-0.93; p-0.0001), Honesty (MD-0.67; p-

0.0009), Loyalty (MD-0.59; p-0.0025), Responsibility

(MD-0.57; p-0.0067), Justice (MD-0.85; p-0.0005),

Compassion (MD-0.72; p-0.0017) and Detachment

(MD-0.52; p-0.0418). Similarly the „Yes‟ group and

„No‟ group to the belief that „Present Life Influences

Afterlife‟ showed significant difference on their moral

traits; Integrity (MD-0.8; p-0.0007), Honesty (MD-

0.59; p-0.0022), Humility (MD-0.44; p-0.0436),

Justice (MD-0.72; p-0.0021), Compassion (MD-0.63 ;

p-0.0043), Detachment (MD-0.57; p-0.0212) and

Forgiveness (MD-0.67; p-0.0088).

Previous studies in moral psychology has

identified that there is a significant relationship

between metaphysical beliefs and moral competency.

Though there exists contradicting philosophical

opinions regarding the influence of metaphysical

beliefs on morality, the present study convincingly

presents with adequate statistical significance that

Varghese and Raj


Global Population

337

there is a positive relation between metaphysic beliefs

and moral competency. The present study found that

the metaphysical beliefs influence the moral traits and

thus manipulate the moral competency and the

different metaphysical beliefs have different levels of

influence on specific moral traits. Earlier studies have

shown that religion and faith in God have significant

role in promoting moral behaviour in the society and

unjust acts against the scriptural codes of the religio-

spiritual institution evokes strong corrective emotions

(Mikula et al., 1998) leading to moral evaluation of

one‟s actions (Greene and Haidt, 2002). Religious

believers perceive violations of moral codes and all

sorts of harm to others as offensive to God (Mikula, et

al, 1998; Knobe, 2003). Belief in a higher being create

a sense in the individuals that they are being watched

and they are accountable for every action and such

belief deters believers from doing what is understood

as wrong (Raven, 1999; Atran and Norenzayan, 2004;

Johnson and Krüger, 2004; Bering, 2006). Similarly

believers in God consider their social relationships in

line with their personal relationship with God and the

same reflects in their day to day social interactions

(Johnson and Krüger, 2004; Bering, 2006; Kirkpatrick

and Shaver, 1992). The metaphysical beliefs

considered in this study are directly or indirectly

linked to the faith in God. Belief in Afterlife and

belief in the influence of present life on afterlife is

entirely dependent on the existence of a God or higher

being. However individuals differ and do not

mandatorily posses unique set of beliefs. Statistical

analysis of the results in the present study

convincingly confirms with adequate level of

significance that, the specific metaphysical beliefs like

belief in God, belief in Afterlife and belief in the sway

of the present life on Afterlife, manipulates moral

competency.

9. CONCLUSION

Significant difference was seen in the present study

between the criterion groups on their levels of moral

competency with reference to their attitude towards

the basic metaphysical questions. Findings of the

present study convincingly directs towards the

conclusion that the metaphysical beliefs have

significant influence on the moral competency. Based

on the findings of the study the following conclusions

are drawn.

(a) Moral competency differs significantly between

individuals who „believe‟ and „do not believe‟ in a

personal God or a Higher Being beyond Self.

(b) Moral Competency differs significantly

between individuals who „believe‟ and „do not

believe‟ in an Afterlife.

(c) Moral Competency differs significantly

between individuals who „believe‟ and „do not

believe‟ in the notion that there will be a judgement

after death and the present life will influence that.

(d) Different Metaphysical beliefs have different

levels of influence on specific moral traits.

10. LIMITATIONS

The present study was conducted in a relatively small

population, highly heterogeneous in nature and only

those individuals‟ comfortable using computer and

internet could be included in the study. As the data

was collected online and as the questionnaire of the

study was provided in English, only those individuals

who have working knowledge in English could

respond to the questionnaire. Another limitation of the

study is that, there is only trace participation in this

research from majority of the countries mentioned

earlier and may not necessarily represent the country

or the continent in specific.

11. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

As clarified in the introduction and the conceptual

model that guided this research, there are multiple

psycho-social, geo-political, environmental and

biological factors that influence the moral information

processing in the human mind. The present study

concentrated only on studying the influence of

metaphysical beliefs on moral competency and there

is wider scope of in-depth research, exploring the

influence of other mentioned factors, in global

context. The present research included a highly

diverse and heterogeneous population and no specific

concentration was made on any specific geo-political

or demographic factors. There is scope of further

similar research in specific homogenous populations.

REFERENCES

Atran S, Norenzayan A (2004). Religion‟s

evolutionary landscape: Counter intuition,

commitment, compassion, communion.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27: 713–770.

Bergson H (1954). The two sources of morality and

religion.

Bering JM (2006). The folk psychology of souls.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29, 453–498.

Collins, Jim Good to Great, 2001, Harper

Collins

Cushman F, Young L, Hauser M (2006). The role of

conscious reasoning and intuition in moral

judgment: Testing three principles of harm.

Psychological Science, 12: 1082–1089.


338

Demoulin S, Saroglou V, Van Pachterbeke M (2008).

Infra-humanizing others, supra-humanizing

gods: The emotional hierarchy. Social

Cognition, 26(2): 235–247.

Durkheim E (1973). Emile Durkheim on morality and

society. University of Chicago Press, 1973.

Gray HM, Gray K, Wegner DM (2007). Dimensions

of mind perception. Science, 315, 619.

Green RM (1978). Religious Reason: The Rational

and Moral Basis of Religious Belief.

Greene J, Haidt J (2002). How (and where) does

moral judgment work? Trends in Cognitive

Sciences, 6: 517–523

Haidt J, Koller SH, Dias MG (1993). Affect, culture,

and morality, or is it wrong to eat your dog?

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

65: 613–628.

Hepburn RW (1976). Morality and religion. Journal of

medical ethics, 2(2): 93.

Johnson DDP, Krüger O (2004). The good of wrath:

Supernatural punishment and the evolution of

cooperation. Political Theology, 5: 159–176.

Kant I (1981). Grounding for the Metaphysics of

Morals. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing

Company.

Kirkpatrick LA, Shaver PR (1992). An attachment–

theoretical approach to romantic love and

religious belief. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 18: 266–275.

Knobe J (2003). Intentional action and side effects in

ordinary language. Analysis, 63: 190–193

Knobe J, Nichols S (2008). An experimental

philosophy manifesto. Experimental

philosophy, 3-14.

Lawrence Kohelberg, Essays on Moral Development

(1981) Vols. I and II, The Philosophy of Moral

Development and The Psychology of Moral

Development (1984), published by Harper &

Row.

Lennick D, Kiel F (2005). Moral Intelligence:

Enhancing Business Performance and

Leadership Success, Wharton School

Publishing, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, p.

215- q247

Lennick D, Kiel (2005). Fred Moral Intelligence.

Wharton School Publishing (Prentice Hall)

Martin DE (2010). Moral Competency Inventory

Validation: Content, Construct, Convergent and

Discriminant Approaches. Management

Research Review, 33: 437-451.

Mazar N, Amir O, Ariely D (2007). Mostly honest: A

theory of self–concept maintenance.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Mikula G, Scherer KR, Athenstaedt U (1998). The

role of injustice in the elicitation of differential

emotional reactions. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 24: 769–783.

Mitchell B (1970). Law, morality, and religion in a

secular society. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Mohesn Golparvar, Safoura Dehghan, Ali Mehdad

(2014) Relationship between Emotional

Exhaustion and Deviant Behaviors: Moderating

Role of Big Five Personality Traits,

International Journal of Scientific Research in

Knowledge, 2(6), pp. 285-296.

Morgan SP (1983). A research note on religion and

morality: Are religious people nice

people?. Social Forces, 683-692.

Murdoch I (1994). Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals.

Penguin.

Pew Research Center, March (2014) Worldwide,

Many See Belief in God as Essential to

Morality.

Raven BH (1999). Kurt Lewin address: Influence,

power, religion, and the mechanisms of social

control.Journal of Social Issues, 55, 161–186.

Rossano MJ (2006). The religious mind and the

evolution of religion. Review of General

Psychology, 10: 346–364.

Shariff AF, Norenzayan, A. (2007). God is watching

you: Priming God concepts increases prosocial

behavior in an anonymous economic game.

Psychological Science, 18, 803–809.

Spilka B, Hood RW, Hunsberger B, Gorsuch R

(2003). The psychology of religion: An

empirical approach. Guilford Press.

Varghese BP, Raj SJM (2014). Crime Rates in India:

Role of Morality and Moral Reasoning,

International Research Journal of Social

Sciences, 3(1): 45-50.

Varghese BP, Raj SJM (2014). Psycho-Social

Determinants of Morality: A Comprehensive

Review of the Factors of Moral Information

Processing, The International Journal Of

Humanities & Social Studies, 2: 131-135.

Weinert F (2001). Concept of competence: A

conceptual clarification. In D. S. Rychen & L.

H. Salganik (Eds.), Defining and selecting key

competencies (pp. 45-65). Seattle, WA:

Hogrefe and Huber.

Varghese and Raj


Global Population

339

Bipin P. Varghese is a Part-time PhD Scholar in Psychology in the R&D Centre, Bharathiar

University, Coimbatore, India. He works as Manager in the Indian Institute of Space Science and

Technology, Trivandrum under the Dept. of Space, Govt of India. He has done his Bachelor level

studies in Life Science and Education and Post Graduate studies in Psychological Counselling. He has

obtained Master Degrees in Sociology, Applied Psychology and Philosophy; and Master of

Philosophy Degree in Psychology. His research interests are mostly inter-disciplinary and include

Adolescent Psychopathology, Anhedonia and Depression Studies, Bio-Psycho-Social Influences on

Mental Health and Wellbeing, Human Moral Information Processing, Creationism, Pneumatology and

Philosophical Questions on Ontology and Existence.

Dr. S. John Michael Raj is the Dean of College Development Council and Professor, Dept of

Psychology, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore. He also holds multiple responsible posts in the

University and at National level and has guided several M. Phil and Ph. D Scholars. After completing

his Graduation, Post Graduation and Master of Philosophy Degrees in Psychology from the University

of Madras, he obtained his Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology from Bharathiar University

Coimbatore in 1986. His areas of interest include Motivational Dynamics, Personality Orientations,

Well-being, Cyber Psychology, Counselling Psychology, Psychology of Marriage etc. and have

authored several widely acclaimed publications in National and International Journals and books in

psychology.

Documents

Do Metaphysical Beliefs Manipulate Moral Competency? A Study in the Context of Cultural Diversities, Involving Global Population